IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. N. PHANEENDRA CRL.P. NO. 310/2017 BETWEEN 1. SRI. SURENDRA KUMAR BAJAJ, S/O ANANDLAL BAJAJ, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, NO 3, SALARPURIA WINDSOR, 4TH FLOOR, ULSOOR ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 042 2. SRI. PRADEEP H. M., S/O H. B. MOHAN KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS NO 3, SALARPURIA WINDSOR, 4TH FLOOR, ULSOOR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 042 3. SRI. ASHWIN SANCHETI, S/O LATE MANOHARCHAND SANCHETI, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, NO 3, SALARPURIA WINDSOR, 4TH FLOOR, ULSOOR ROAD, BENGALURU CITY – 560 042 ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MAHESH S., ADV.) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY SARJAPURA POLICE STATION, 2. SRI. RAVINDRA V., S/O VEMANNA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, DOMMASANDRA VILLAGE, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S. RACHAIAH, HCGP FOR R-1 SRI. RAYAZ SAB B. G., ADV. FOR R-2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1144/2015 AS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS HEREIN PENDING ON THE FILE OF HON'BLE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., ANEKAL THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioners, respondent No.2 and their respective counsels are present before the court. Both of them have filed a Memo of Settlement stating that, the dispute arose between themselves have been settled between themselves.
2. Heard the parties and their counsels. Perused the records and the Memo of settlement and the affidavits filed by the petitioner Nos.1 to 3 and respondent No.2.
3. In the Memo of Settlement, it is stated that the second respondent and his family members have filed a Civil Suit in OS No.921/2013 before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Anekal against the petitioners herein (Defendants in the OS) seeking certain reliefs. Against which, the second respondent has initiated criminal proceedings against the petitioners herein for the offence punishable under sections 120B, 419, 420, 468, 471 of IPC. The criminal complaint appears to be an off-shoot of the civil dispute between the parties, because the said criminal case came to be lodged subsequent to the filing of the civil suit.
4. Now, the parties have entered into an amicable settlement resolving the dispute among themselves by filing a Memo of Settlement. Under the above said circumstances, when the parties have settled their dispute in its entirety, both civil and criminal matters, in order to facilitate them to live happily in future, it is just and necessary to quash the proceedings. The petitioners and respondent No.2 have filed their respective affidavits before this court in consonance with the Memo of settlement filed by them.
5. At this stage, it is worth to note here a decision rendered in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another [(2012) 10 SCC 303], wherein the Apex Court has held thus:-
“Power of High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from power of a criminal court of compounding offences under S. 320 - Cases where power to quash criminal proceedings may be exercised where the parties have settled their dispute, held, depends on facts and circumstances of each case - Before exercise of inherent quashment power under S.482, High Court must have due regard to nature and gravity of the crime and its societal impact ”
6. In view of the above cited decision, when the matter is essentially civil in nature and criminal case arose out of civil dispute, in such an eventuality, if the parties resolve their entire dispute, continuation of criminal proceedings is abuse of process of court. The factual aspects of this case also falls under the category mentioned in the above decision. Hence, the said proceedings are liable to be quashed.
In view of the circumstances stated above, I do not find any strong reasons to reject the Memo of Settlement. Hence, the following:
ORDER The Petition is allowed. Joint Memo of Settlement filed by the parties is hereby accepted. Consequently, the entire proceedings in CC No.1144/2015 pending against the petitioners herein for the offence punishable under sections 120B, 419, 420, 468, 471 of IPC on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) & JMFC Court, Anekal, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE PL*